Department of Surgery, School of Medical and Health Sciences, Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
University of Arizona College of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2021 Oct;65(9):1240-1247. doi: 10.1111/aas.13938. Epub 2021 Jun 24.
The use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum seems to be capable of reducing complications such as post-operative pain. However, the quality of evidence supporting this conclusion is low. Both the lack of investigator blinding to both intra-abdominal pressure and to method of neuromuscular blockade represent key sources of bias. Hence, this prospective, randomised, and double-blind study aimed to compare the quality of recovery (Questionnaire QoR-40) of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy under low-pressure and standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum. We tested the hypothesis that low pneumoperitoneum pressure enhances the quality of recovery following LC.
Eighty patients who underwent elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into two groups, a low-pressure (10 mm Hg) pneumoperitoneum group and a standard-pressure (14 mm Hg) pneumoperitoneum group. For all participants, the value of the insufflation pressure was kept hidden and only the nurse responsible for the operating room was aware of it. Deep neuromuscular blockade was induced for all cases [train-of-four (TOF) = 0; post-tetanic count (PTC) > 0]. The quality of recovery was assessed on the morning of first post-operative day.
No difference was found in either total score or in its different dimensions according to the QoR-40 questionnaire. The patients in the low-pressure pneumoperitoneum group experienced more pain during forced coughing measured at 4 hours (median difference [95% CI], 1 [0-2]; P = .030), 8 hours (1 [0-2]; P = .030) and 12 hours (0 [0-1] P = .025) after discharge from the post-anaesthesia care unit, when compared with those in the standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum group.
We thus conclude that the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy does not improve the quality of recovery.
使用低压气腹似乎能够减少术后疼痛等并发症。然而,支持这一结论的证据质量较低。缺乏对腹腔内压力和神经肌肉阻滞方法的研究者盲法,是产生偏倚的两个关键来源。因此,本前瞻性、随机、双盲研究旨在比较低压和标准气压气腹下接受腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者的恢复质量(QoR-40 问卷)。我们检验了低压气腹能增强 LC 后恢复质量的假设。
80 例择期行腹腔镜胆囊切除术的患者被随机分为两组,一组为低压(10mmHg)气腹组,另一组为标准气压(14mmHg)气腹组。所有患者的充气压力值均被隐藏,只有负责手术室的护士才知道。所有患者均诱导深度神经肌肉阻滞(TOF=0;后强直计数(PTC)>0)。术后第一天早晨评估恢复质量。
根据 QoR-40 问卷,总评分或其不同维度均无差异。与标准气压气腹组相比,低压气腹组患者在离开麻醉后护理病房后 4 小时(中位数差值[95%CI],1[0-2];P=0.030)、8 小时(1[0-2];P=0.030)和 12 小时(0[0-1];P=0.025)时用力咳嗽时疼痛更明显。
因此,我们得出结论,在择期腹腔镜胆囊切除术中使用低压气腹并不能提高恢复质量。